nationfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Speakers' Corner/Archives/6 FedElections 2012
Vote for Ygo August Donia! Vote for me. These are my political viewpoints: :Political stance Ygo A. Donia is a conservative politician for the CCPL. He is against: *Abortion *Atheïsm *Democracy *(too much) freedom of speech *Girly men *Hippies *Judges Along with everything he considers to be weak. He loves: *The army *Sports *Beer *Hot women *Jesus *The Lord *Oceana *Guns If you want a total badass in congress, vote Ygo and you'll get the pirate eyepatch in all it's amazing awesomeness for free! :The glorious First Consul of Rome 22:58, December 15, 2011 (UTC) ::PS: If you do NOT vote for me, you are gay. The glorious First Consul of Rome 22:59, December 15, 2011 (UTC) I like democracy, abortion, atheïsm, girly men, judges, and freedom of speech, so I will not be voting for you. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 01:21, December 16, 2011 (UTC) I like hot women too. It's a shame you'd have to be against having pre-marital sex with any of those hot women... That was a really immature response, but I just thought I'd throw that one out there. Cheers, --LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss) 02:21, December 16, 2011 (UTC) :I do not mind pre-marital sex one bit. People have to live a little first before they settle down in a marriage. The glorious First Consul of Rome 09:44, December 16, 2011 (UTC) Vote for Christopher Costello When he's not hanging out with the J-Man at Church, doing community service, or giving out free money... he's probably hanging out at your local bar! So suit up, hurry on down and meet the millionaire himself! Take pictures, get free autographs, or come to him seeking advice with the ladies. Maybe there'll even be free cash in it for you! Log-in to Communipedia for a complete list of the bars he'll stop by and the times when you can find him. Ladies drink free. Just remember to vote Christopher Costello for congress in January. Cheers, --LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss) 02:55, December 16, 2011 (UTC) :Mr. Costello shares my respect for the J-Man and I'm pretty sure he knows how to party. Throw in the ladies-drink-free and the free money and it's pretty much a win-win situation. Can we still vote for three guys? Then you'll get one my votes. The glorious First Consul of Rome 09:46, December 16, 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the support! :) Also, I think that I should through it out there that I will be having a personal interviewed conducted in the near future so that you all can know what to expect from me, and how I feel about the "Goyou monopoly scandal", which was only recently brought to light. Expect more from me in the near future, everyone. --LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss) 23:15, December 16, 2011 (UTC) :I except the world from you, Mr. Costello. You are well on your way of becoming a living legend, much like I did after the Brigade-controversy and the Galahad v. The Brigade Trial. Scandals are the best way of getting yourself noticed, and expanding your reputation. Bad publicity is good publicity! The glorious First Consul of Rome 23:20, December 16, 2011 (UTC) Thanks! I've been taking your advice a lot in the past few days. -- LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss - ) 02:59, December 21, 2011 (UTC) :I noticed. And so did the rest of the nation, which is always a good thing. Mr. Costello will soon dominate all the major newspapers the way the likes of me, Alexandru Latin and Pierlot McCrooke did in our days. Despite all the controversy, I even made it to PM once (untill Arthur Jefferson banned me). Mr. Villanova will have a tough opponent in you. The glorious First Consul of Rome 13:30, December 21, 2011 (UTC) I think that Mr. Villanova's time as PM is coming to a close. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:44, December 21, 2011 (UTC) :Probably yes. He basically left the wiki months ago and never really returned the same as he left us. The game hasn't changed but the players have. The glorious First Consul of Rome 14:55, December 21, 2011 (UTC) No need to say it like your day under the spotlight has come to an end. We're both still here. As for Villanova, I agree. It's a shame how so many great people are intent on leaving and have already given up on Lovia. I'll certainly be here when the PM elections come though. -- LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss - ) 15:34, December 21, 2011 (UTC) :Yes, I am still here. But that's about it. I no longer have the dedication and the commitment. I used to have at least a little bit of dedication, but now... not so much. I am not longer powerful or influential and the right is fading away. You should look forward to the 6th of January, Mr. Costello. Then someone much more interesting will return to us. Worse then I ever was. The glorious First Consul of Rome 15:45, December 21, 2011 (UTC) I say you should be more optimistic. Everyone saying that they're losing their enthusiasm sets a melancholy mood for the project. Thin of it like this, whenever you have the time to put in a little bit of political effort, you'll probably be right back in all of the action. We've all heard that you were making a comeback. I'll definitely support you if the coalition I'm in doesn't take all of my votes away. And who are you referring to, who will return in January? -- LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss - ) 16:02, December 21, 2011 (UTC) :There is nothing wrong with a bit of melancholy every once in a while. Longing for the past, thinking of the good ol' days. I am still optimistic about the future and that is for a large part do to people like you and TimeMaster and Jeff and Kunarian joining in. Flesh blood. That's what the wiki needs to stay alive, and so far, it has kept Lovia alive for almost 5 years now! The guy who will return in early January is McCrooke. The one and only. Read some old articles from La Quotidienne and his character's article and you'll see he's an interesting fellow. One of the baddest dudes around, but very experienced. The glorious First Consul of Rome 16:10, December 21, 2011 (UTC) Everything will be A-OK! Good day, :I am Bill An, the CEO and the Chair of Goyou. Even if we have made a monopoly, we fully support well-defined anti-monopolization efforts. I myself would request a vote of any kind to Bill An. Why? Even though we at Goyou have been claimed to be a monopoly, we have attempted to satisfy everyone. Please, vote for Bill An of Positive Lovia. --J•t 03:34, December 24, 2011 (UTC) You've got my support, bro. -- LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss - ) 22:12, December 27, 2011 (UTC) Why not Juche? Hi I'm Lee Feng a Juche believer. I Like Kim Il Sung and he is the Great Leader! Pleas for me give a vote. I give you peace on Lovia. I am the Lovian Peace Party candidate. --J•t 03:34, December 24, 2011 (UTC) Because in your political party's article, you gave us plenty of reasons why the Final Peace Party has bad intentions. :I -- LCPCOP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss - ) 22:10, December 27, 2011 (UTC) I Warn All Citizens Of Lovia To Not Vote For Lee Feng He Is The Great Evil In This World He Will Destroy Lovia. --Concerned Citizen 21:32, January 6, 2012 (UTC) Vote for me! My viewpoints: *Decrease polarisation in Congress - the left and right must work together. Party politics must not allowed to reach as great an extent as in the first 2011 election. *Impose social democratic policies which however must allow economic growth to continue. *Increase power of states slightly, so as to make them worth having, and possible creation of state councils. *Conservative attitudes to gay marriage, abortion and euthanasia, while retaining a willingness to compromise with others who don't hold these views. *Join international organisations such as OAS, UWN, UN. Enter NAFTA customs union. In particular, foster closer relations in the USA, while retaining independence. *Create and improve articles related to Lovian culture and history, which are sadly lacking *Abolish or reform the abstain option in Congress. In essence, it's just a nicer form of contra. If you have any questions, please ask! :) --Semyon 20:17, January 6, 2012 (UTC) :Ah, whoops - the poster says May. Just read it as January. --Semyon 20:19, January 6, 2012 (UTC) ::May I ask, mr Breyev, three questions. what is your opinion on the establishment of a paramilitary force within Lovia after so much strife and turmoil do the people not deserve a force that will be far more capable of protecting them than anything Lovia has had before? Do you value socialist ideas over conservative even in the case of polarisation, and which parties are of most interest in polarisation? And would you support the confederacy referendum and if so do you support the idea of a confederate states of Lovia giving greater power to the people? Kunarian 21:16, January 6, 2012 (UTC) I am against abolishing the abstention option. It may be a nicer form of contra, but I like that it's nicer. It doesn't seem to mean "not a chance," like contra does. It means "I have this doubt. . . please fix and maybe I'll go pro. . ." —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:29, January 6, 2012 (UTC) @Kunarian: Some answers. :) #Although a defence force is not really necessary IMO, it is a nice idea and I would support a good proposal for it, as long as it didn't exceed about 250 men (around the size of Monaco's). I would also like to consider the idea of a defence treaty with the USA. #Generally I value conservative ideas over socialist ones. When I say I am against polarisation, I mean that I want the left and right to be able to work together in government, so no users are excluded, while of course maintaining their differences. #By 'confederacy referendum' I suppose you mean a referendum on giving more power to the states? I don't think referenda are really useful in Lovia, because almost all users are members of Congress already. However, I certainly support giving more power to the states. I hope these are satisfactory. --Semyon 10:37, January 7, 2012 (UTC) Brilliant! glad for the great answers. Kunarian 12:28, January 7, 2012 (UTC) I did vote outside of the box. :D — Christopher Costello (Pikapi • Chat • ) 01:54, January 10, 2012 (UTC) :Ah, but not for me, so it doesn't count. :) --Semyon 12:19, January 14, 2012 (UTC) A Moderate and Reformist Hello! My name is William Krosby. I'm a member of the Liberal Democratic Party. I'm the candidate for Prime Minister from the centrist Coalition. I support a government that can guide but not strictly control the economy, and moderate and centrist taxes and spending. I also believe that it is not the government's place to dictate morality when it is victimless. Gay marriage and abortion should be legal--if you do not support these, do not do it yourselves and turn a blind eye to those who are. I also support reform of the Lovian system. I want to re-organize the executive branch into ministries and an active cabinet that does its job, and change the courts to be fair and unbiased judiciaries that can be trusted to make the right decision in courts of law. Thanks for any votes. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:29, January 6, 2012 (UTC) Oos Wes Ilava (CCPL) Oos Wes Ilava 10:42, January 7, 2012 (UTC) I will vote for you, but not straight away. :) --Semyon 10:54, January 7, 2012 (UTC) :Yes, I'd like to wait a bit longer as well, but as you a closest to me in viewpoints, you surely get a vote from me too :) --OuWTBsjrief-mich 12:39, January 7, 2012 (UTC) You can now see why I will maintain my vote for you should the coalition fail. Btw do you support the confederate reform? and do you think christianity should be the primary religion or the only religion in Lovia or are you simply more concerned with it? Kunarian 12:59, January 7, 2012 (UTC) NO I WILL NOT VOTE YOU. DO YOU KNOW WHY? I HATE JUST CHRISTIANITY BEING PROMOTED WHERE OTHER RELIGIONS CANNOT; I LIKE LOVIA THE WAY IT IS. -- 14:29, January 7, 2012 (UTC) Why don't you go make the Conservative Buddhist Party of Lovia? It'd be awesome! —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:31, January 7, 2012 (UTC) : He kinda has...the Lovian Peace party, it has bad intentions, like a private milita n' such. Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:35, January 7, 2012 (UTC) ::That party is a pro-juche party. It has nothing to do with Buddhism. It would probably ban religion, since for some reason authoritarian communist states like doing that. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:36, January 7, 2012 (UTC) You guys clearly do not understand what Christian democracy means. Not that strange, as it's typically European. Christian democracy means governing a nation based on Christian principles such as peace, unity and tolerance. This means we don't promote Christianity, nor do we forbid other religions. We think all religions could have a place in Lovia. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:40, January 8, 2012 (UTC) Don't forget intolerance. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:23, January 8, 2012 (UTC) :TM, I am a very tolerant human being. If I wasn't, I would've simply blocked all of you progressive people in one go and win the elections with 100% :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 14:30, January 8, 2012 (UTC) My first plans *Companies that have strong presence have to pay Lovian taxes, even if they are registered in tax paradises like Jersey or Liechtenstein. *Chain stores may be barred from opening stores in favor of local shops. This is to keep livability, and to strenthen local benefits. *Toys included with fastfood should be forbidden Pierlot McCrooke 13:43, January 8, 2012 (UTC) *Job bureaus should be established for the people who can not find work. People will only get 'uitkeringen' when the Job bureau can't find a job or are rejected for normal work by a specialized doctor due to handicaps Pierlot McCrooke 14:25, January 8, 2012 (UTC) You only live twice...not In the real world, you only have one life. Do you want to spend it wasting money on cigarettes and dying much faster, or would you rather breathe clean air and live a healthful life. If so, be sure to vote Labour in the current elections. Vote ABRAHAMS and VILLANOVA! And vote Lewis too! HORTON11: • 22:38, January 9, 2012 (UTC) I support this! Vote LDP too! :D —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:43, January 9, 2012 (UTC) :Yeah, you can't live to a ripe old age and still smoke... NOT! Johannes Heesters died two weeks ago at 108. He was still singing and playing in movies. He smoked for 90+ years, and he drank a lot of alcohol too. No cancer, no health problems, no trouble with his voice. Winston Churchill would be another example: he smoked and drank like there ain't no tommorrow and he made it to 90. He was also pretty obese. My next-door neigbor, who was a vegetarian, drank smoothies and fruitshakes and always went jogging, died at 46 from a heart-attack. Now I'm not saying smoking and drinking is good for you. That'd be silly. But happy people generally live much longer and more satisfying lifes then health-freaks who are always stressed out about how many calories they consume or afraid to inhale a little bit of smoke by accidant. Just sayin'. The glorious First Consul of Rome 22:52, January 9, 2012 (UTC) ::But, most people who smoke a lot do have multiple problems. And I am not promoting people to be health freaks, that is wrong too. But Lovians should not be the type of guys that smoke 2 pack/day and spend thousands yearly on smokes. My grandpa smoke a ton and he did not die from it, but smoking triggered a bunch of other things that did. HORTON11: • 22:56, January 9, 2012 (UTC) :::No, not "most people who smoke have multiple problems". My great-grandfather died at the rip old age of 95. Never got ill a single day in his life, didn't even catch a cold. He smoked a lotta cigars and drank a lot of brandy and cognac, though. My grandfather is still alive and doing well. He has no health problems and he smokes too. He can still do 15 push-ups with ease. And then I know this guy who is severely handicapped. He doesn't smoke, he doesn't drink, yet he's still fucked regardless of his lifestyle. You cannot forbid smoking because "some people get ill from it" or because "some people might increase the risk of cancer". You what sort of people the Lovians should be? The sort of people that are free to make their own choices in life, good or bad. They are not toddlers that need to be taken by the hand and shown what is right or wrong. The people of Lovia are smart enough to understand the results of their actions and to oversee the future. The glorious First Consul of Rome 23:04, January 9, 2012 (UTC) ::::Nothing personal, but as a conservative you don't know any better than to support smoking. Many of my great uncles/aunts got real bad from smoking (and smoking-related issues). And on another note, my grandmother drikns a lot, brandy, bourbon, wine at the table every day and she's fine. But she won't smoke at all. HORTON11: • 23:18, January 9, 2012 (UTC) :::::I don't support smoking, but if the point that you were trying to get across in your image macro was that you plan on banning and/or illegalizing smoking, that is only taking more rights away from the people by establishing another pointless law. If you are so against smoking, you'd think you'd try outlawing cannabis, and things like that first. But then again I wouldn't support that either. :P — Christopher Costello (Pikapi • Chat • ) 01:52, January 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Being a smoker (and drinker :P) myself, I can say all that stuff about smoking is way too exaggerated. It's perfectly safe to smoke a few cigarettes a day :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 05:17, January 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::::Esch cigarette you smoke is cousing you more harm (so it's really not safe, its just conservative mumbo-jumbo to get support for the tobacco industry). And Chris, I am not trying to ban or illegalize smoking, I would like to regulate it, inform people about it (and the several hands of smoking) and ultimately get more to quit smoking. HORTON11: • 12:54, January 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::The Tobacco law we currently already have is quite dramatic, so on the legislative level no changes are necessary. Of course some campaigning won't hurt. I remember that Jamal once made a anti-smoking campaign, but it became inactive. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 13:48, January 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::It would be mostly educating and creating programs to help people quit smoking. HORTON11: • 14:18, January 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::Sounds great I'd say :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 14:42, January 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::The government should not force people (they do not need to, it's too much work), but it should help them help themselves. HORTON11: • 16:40, January 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::::Well, help them help themselves is bit negative è :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 16:45, January 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::::Horton is right. The government can not force people to stop smoking. I know how difficult a task it is (I speak NOT from experience). You can set up support groups, organize meetings and prepare schedules for participants in this program will CERTAINLY help people stop smoking (or at least REDUCING). Vote for LEWIS, VILLANOVA and ABRAHAMS. Wabba The I 17:43, January 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::::::Wabba, please look at the statistics first. Since the '90's Dutch government has been putting millions of euros and guilders for anti-smoking compaigns, while the number of smokers dropped maybe 20%, being stable since the beginning of this century. Only the die-hards are left, they ain't gonna stop. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 18:04, January 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::::::That's in the netherlands. Lovia does not need to spend millions of euros, only a more modest amount. And btw, a more comprehensive anti-smoking law should be legislated, perhaps banning smoking in public areas (restaurants, cafes, stores, buses). HORTON11: • 18:09, January 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::::::: Then should not the government, but an organization formed by a political party or public (non-smoking and smoking). They can support (grants and money) getting various members or the political party or founder. That should not have much money and besides, where is that money is needed (medication?). It helps nothing. Smokers should reduce unnecessary pills. What you talked about, which is the Netherlands. This is Lovia. Wabba The I 18:16, January 10, 2012 (UTC) Why is smoking at the top of our "government needs to deal with this" list? we have more important things like taxes, defence and legal systems we need to look at. Plus we don't need any government sponsored campaigns, attack ads are the worst ads. You don't attack someone because of their choice, you help them and telling them that "their penis is gunna droop, their lungs are tar or they kill other people with smoke" as if they are the devil himself, is an attack ad. You don't need huge reforms to deal with little problems, even big problems can be dealt with little solutions. We need more unity right now, not less. and on an off note VOTE HOFFMANN. Kunarian 18:18, January 10, 2012 (UTC) But if no-one does a thing on the bropleme, it still will exist and be-come a bigger probleme. Edebast 18:27, January 10, 2012 (UTC) : We already have a solution that I proposed that wouldn't include raising taxes, funding attack campaigns or banning smoking. see it on the pub page. Kunarian 19:26, January 10, 2012 (UTC) Y U NO LIKE SMOKE?? :*sighs* — Christopher Costello (Pikapi • Chat • ) 19:18, January 10, 2012 (UTC) ::I find it ridiculous that progressives claim to be tolerant and liberal and then say things like 'as a conservative you don't know any better.' Back on topic, a ban on tobacco would fail for the same reason that prohibition did in the US; the market is too large to suddenly disappear, it'll just be provided illegally instead. NB this argument does not apply to things like cannabis or heroin because comparatively few people buy them. --Semyon 11:53, January 14, 2012 (UTC) Why CCPL is awesome! Why CCPL, you ask? That's an easy one! Because God, my brothers and sisters, is just effing awesome. He is, in fact, so awesome, that I won't even be cursing in this message. The awesomeness is well-illustrated by the poster I will add below: Please, vote CCPL. Because my friends, CCPL is very cool and very hip. And CCPL spreaks your language. And knows what YOU want. And WHY you want what you want. Because God told us. So, vote CCPL. That's basically the message. :The glorious First Consul of Rome 19:23, January 20, 2012 (UTC) Support Joshua Katz, Porcine PM candidate! A vote for Katz is a vote against prejudice and against pigotry. MOTCs, show your support for Katz, here, now! --Joshua Katz, 17:29, January 30, 2012 (UTC) What is your position on prejudice against wild boars? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 18:53, January 30, 2012 (UTC) I love sausages, bacon, ham, ribs and all things PORK (except organs). Unless you support that, I am not a supporter of HRH's party. HORTON11: • 20:35, January 30, 2012 (UTC) I have to admit, Mr. Krosby, that your question caught me slightly off-guard. However, I have consulted with His Imperial Highness, who gave me the following, roughly translated, explanation: :Boardom is the ideal state for all pigs. Ah, the joy of a simple life in the forest, unshackled to feeble man! It is clear to us, that in fact boars do not suffer from misguided prejudice as we do, trapped as we are between the Scylla and Charybdis of the farmer and the butcher. :Clearly, we would not wish to force human so-called 'civilisation' upon them, and boars will not receive duties such as citizenship, voting or ruling Lovia. However, if any boar wishes to take these up of his own accord, feeling he could live a better life with his domestic brethren, then we will be the last pig to stand in his way. Only he would be a very foolish porker. Having gone to the trouble of giving you such a complete answer, Mr. Krosby, I feel the Emperor deserves some of your votes. As for you, Mr. Abrahams, yours is precisely the attitude we are fighting against. Would you find it acceptable for His Imperial Highness to express a desire to eat your family? For that it precisely what you have done to His Imperial Highness. Joshua Katz, 20:45, January 30, 2012 (UTC) I have not done anything to HIH excenpt defend man's right to eat what he pleases. And why do you only defend pigs if there are many other animals that need protecting more (look at the millions of chicken stuffed into factory farm). You know, instead of arguing with the system why do you not just propose laws for the humane treatment of animals. HORTON11: • 20:52, January 30, 2012 (UTC) Chickens are not worthy of comparison with pigs. And you say you 'have not done anything to HIH excenpt defend man's right to eat what he pleases!' Quite enough too, I should think! It is hard to conceive of a worse crime that the sullying of sacred porcine flesh with your filthy human gullet. Joshua Katz, 20:59, January 30, 2012 (UTC) I think a pig's right to not be eaten is MUCH more important than a human's right to eat what they want. How barbaric of you to suggest that humans should eat whatever pleases them, Mr. Abrahams! On a side note, Mr. Katz, I'm afraid that the Emperor is not running and so I can't vote for him. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:55, January 30, 2012 (UTC) Due to blatant discrimination it is true the Emperor is not personally running, but he is represented by yours truly, Joshua Katz, 22:37, January 30, 2012 (UTC) Noted. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 01:51, January 31, 2012 (UTC) The Time Has Come. Good day fellow Lovians. Today, I nominate one of our most outstanding politicians to become the Third Supreme Court Judge. I have carefully selected this nominee. He has worked very hard to achieve this outstanding, amazing honor. He is very distinguished, and although he may have recently joined, he is completely fit for this position and I look forward to working with him. This man is William Krosby. Please comment below for your opinion. Thank you. --Bill An - 02:31, February 7, 2012 (UTC) ::WTF mam. --Lee Feng 02:32, February 7, 2012 (UTC) :::One of them, yes. --Semyon 17:47, February 7, 2012 (UTC) ::::What does that mean? --Bill An - 23:02, February 7, 2012 (UTC) Labours Real Policies The time for reform and growth has come and first I would like to focus on the economy, of course the image above is probably the first of many to come, but it highlights a key flaw in Labours policy, while other parties particularly the CCPL and the CNP support the renovation and improvement of Lovia's transport systems and have even made it a key feature in their party policy the Labour party has failed to make even a close reference to it in its aims for 2012. While they complain that Train Village is low in employment and needs to be rebuilt, they fail to recognise like the CNP that turning Train Village into a central hub for transport would be the way forwards and would be better than random government investment like they suggest. We hope that you will see this and realise that to have a truly progressive congress, you need to vote Conservative Nationalist for a real bridge to the future. Kunarian 19:59, April 28, 2012 (UTC) The Liberal Democratic Party supports this. Throwing money at problems does not work and wastes money. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 20:47, April 28, 2012 (UTC) I find it funny thayt you libertarians are saying this. The whit caption should say THE CONSERVATIVE NATIONALIST PARTY DOES, BUT IN PRIVATE HANDS. And honestly it is the government that is better at sdoing those jobs. HORTON11: • We are going to use the government as it should be used, to act with initiative when the private sector won't. The libertarians are simply the ones producing the realistic and sensible ideas. Kunarian 10:54, April 29, 2012 (UTC) I believe private companies should be in a competition. Then, the best company gets a sizable amount of money from the government to go through with their idea (bridge in this case). —TimeMaster (talk • ) 11:56, April 29, 2012 (UTC) I think we could have some major transport reforms and turn Train Village into a real center of transport and maybe at some point then internal trade, however I think we can do this with the government and retain the private competition by letting government set it up and then letting private enterprise make it work. Kunarian 12:04, April 29, 2012 (UTC) CCPL advertisement --OuWTBsjrief-mich 09:58, April 29, 2012 (UTC) Whats the message of this? is it a real church that is being demolished or the church in a spiritual sense? Either way, you have the support of the CNP. Kunarian 10:03, April 29, 2012 (UTC) :In a spiritual sense. CCPL will protect the Christian heritage and make sure Christians can keep the Christian way of life. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:08, April 29, 2012 (UTC) ::Fantastic, as I said, full support from the CNP. Glad to see some posters and maybe campaigns popping up :D Kunarian 10:13, April 29, 2012 (UTC) :::Isn't freedmo of religion guarenteed by the consitution of Lovia? In western democracies there is nothi g to block christians from their way of life. Also what's been happening in the lat months, I have not been very active in wikis.MMunson 22:11, April 29, 2012 (UTC) ::::We are indeed not chased down, but living Christian life as pure as possible currently is not possible. In Lovia there is still a lot to be done. Think about the prohibition to create Christian schools that are fully operational, the loose prostitution legislation (even women smoggling is not forbidden!), euthanasia, loose child abortion legislation, no clear regulations concerning orphans and other children to be adopted, gay marriage is not (at least to some degree) restricted, a lot of laws protecting nature, but not a single law protecting agricultural rights, no animal rights and I can keep going on for ages like this. Some things will probably never be reached (think about restricting gay marriage), while others can be reached within a short time. CCPL will be there to get its main goals done. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 08:59, April 30, 2012 (UTC) Labour Leader's Speech We have seen in the past few days a slander of the Party the represents the people. We have been wrongly accused of kiling faith and buliding a bridge to no where. Which both are false. We will never and have never tried to lessen the power of the church or try to band religous practies. We have though tried to improve the transportation sector of Lovia. Which the CNP, a far right libertarian party, states they would rather have tolls controlled and patrolled by private comapnies which could but toll levies at eight or even nine dollars. And bridge safety would go even more so down. So your choice again. A party which cares for the 1% or a party of the 99% which builds great safe bridges and creates jobs. Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:10, May 5, 2012 (UTC) I don't think Oos' poster was aimed at the Labour party, Marcus, it was aimed at secularisation in general. :) (btw I've grown to loathe the term 'the 99%'.) --Semyon 15:39, May 5, 2012 (UTC) "It seems that Labour has leaped to the defencive and like any cornered animal it swiped at what was nearest including the CCPLs innocent campaign in defence of their faith which was not aimed at Labour. So I will rebuke and reply to the good Villanova's points. Firstly: they claim that they represent the people and the so called 99% while saying that the CNP represents the so called 1%, this could not be a more obvious fallacy considering that it was Villanova who has been preaching the defence of the middle class and to my knowledge does not have 99% of the vote while the CNP have been arguing the defence of the poor first and have been realistic with who they represent, the hard working and the needy. Secondly: They claim they have tried to improve the transportation of Lovia and that we would want privatised and practically monopolised roads, all that when they have no policy on the transportation sector of Lovia while the CNP does! and where in our policy does it state privatisation of the roads? nowhere. And to reply with my third statement: I think that what we see here is two sides of the Labour party, one that wishes to fight and keep with its rigid policies and seems to be headed by Villanova and another that seems to be willing to cooperate and work with the CNP when they see a good idea, albeit with heavy criticism, headed by Abraham. I hope the latter becomes the standard. Support the CNP the party that supports you with low taxes, jobs and freedom whether or not you voted for it." Hoffmann at speakers corner. Kunarian 18:47, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Full rebuttal #No slander, the accusations were made in print, not verbally. #Labour can't claim to be 'the party the represents the people.' 'A party', perhaps. #Labour was not accused of killing faith. #I don't think 'building a bridge to nowhere' is meant to be taken literally. #Have you actually tried to improve the transportation sector of Lovia? #The CNP is not far-right, and this could potentially be viewed as libellous. #Mr. Hoffmann stated explicitly 'I think we can do this with the government.' #The CNP does not 'state they would rather have tolls controlled and patrolled by private comapnies which could but toll levies at eight or even nine dollars.' #Bridge safety might go down, but there's no way you can know this. #Giving the electorate a choice between 'a party which cares for the 1% or a party of the 99%' is a false dichotomy, and also last time I looked at polling figures, Labour weren't achieving 99% of the vote. I'm kind of disappointed because I can barely see one true statement in this speech. --Semyon 15:51, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Seems theres nothing to do here but to maybe do a reply speech. Nice rebuttal btw Semyon couldn't put it better myself. Kunarian 18:47, May 5, 2012 (UTC) #Accusations in print can be considered slander (or defamatory and even libelous) #Labor is the party that best represents the working class, along with CCPL #gotta agree with you on that one, Semyon #Even in a non-literate sense, the CNP has not "built bridges" #The last few days I have engaged in massive discussions with Kunarian to reason out a better transportation system #They are not far right; they resemble those in the US who messed up the country under Bush and who hope to do it if elected into office in November #He may have said he would do it with the government, but it would have to be his way, He has shown on previous occasions that he does not compromise well #But if the CNP had their way almost every industry would be in private hands, which is unacceptable #Enough government subsidy could remove the need for tolls #The main reason that Labour didn't get 99% is cause last-minute and inactive people voted for the other parties. Kunarian, you may have had a plan for transportation but every point you made was full of flaws. After much haggling I have come to a compromise and found a better solution, which the PM largely supports as well. You talk about supporting the poor and all, but really all you want is to deepen the pockets of the corporations at the expense of people who might rather see it in the hands of a responsible government who re-invests it in public utilities and services. I'm glad you see that I am willing to cooperate, but hopefully you can also become cooperative; atm you are up there with Villanova and that has to change. HORTON11: • 21:39, May 5, 2012 (UTC) #Doesn't matter. #And that is determined by? Representing the working class is about developing ways to help lift their tax burden and give them the ability to rise out of poverty, Labour did not even plan to raise the poor out of taxes unlike the CNP and plus your leader talks a lot about the working class. #Good. #Man, you really didn't get the poster, it was a clever point considering your party image is a bridge and you have no transportation plans. #We have along with oos and we have progressed. #Again Horton you need to work on your bias, it will get you no where in life. #Saying I don't compromise is the politicians way of saying I'm not fickle and don't change on a whim, theres your kind of compromise which would mean abandoning my policies and then actual compromise which would keep with them. #Because of course private industries are such bad things and governments have never done anything wrong, remind me agian of russia from 1917 to 1990. Privatisation makes things cheaper and #Where are the tolls again that government needs to subsidise? #That one made me chuckle :D Yes there are errors, mainly due to the lack of easily understood information about Lovias transport systems and the fact that I have not been her for the days when they were installed. And since when does disagreeing on some points and improving on others mean agreeing? that would mean you largely supported my ideas plus we have hardly strayed from my idea, the only one we have a problem with is the rails, the proposal about the harbours has stayed, the proposal about buses simply needs to be expanded. Supporting the poor is not subsidising everything for them, this has never made the poor better off, other things such as economic and social freedoms have made the poor better off and if wanting freedoms makes me bad then I'm bad. But yes onto the good point, cooperation is good, we will find a way there are three of us on it now and I think the idea of a high speed rail has most certainly been canceled despite its advantages, Now we just need to build upon the buses idea and maybe expand on the current rail system and work towards your centralised proposal of newhaven being the hub. Kunarian 06:38, May 6, 2012 (UTC) Horton and Marcus, Labour would never get 99% of the vote. The main reason you guys don't get 99% of the vote is because only 30% of people support you! —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:15, May 6, 2012 (UTC) Kunarian, do not assume that I am in support of full government control of all industries; you should have seen me argue when they nationalized Edison Electric. You talk about the Soviets, but we can head back a little closer to 2008 when the private banks in the US screwed over the world. Those banks were in serious issues during the recession. But if we look at neighbors Canada, they had regulations and policy frameworks in effect much prior to this and none of their major banks went down and people weren't evicted from their homes. Why? Re-gu-la-tion. That's the best solution. If we give all industries to the private sector, they would screw us all over to fill their coffers. If we give it all to government, it is too much work and becomes inefficient. For me the best solution would be to maintain a few key industries like the post and public transit in government hands, and then with enough regulation allow private industry to run it. And about the poor, suvbsidies everywhere isn't gonna help. If we just give them a check, some might just take it and park their ass back on the couch. What we need is to invest in the services and plans to help them become better off, like progressive taxes, public health system, labor training programs. Take a look at Sweden and Denmark, they have followed a heavy social-democrat policies and they have done beautifully. They may have taxes over 50%, but its citizens are happy for the comprehensive net they have and don't really complain. Now, if we set up a good welfare system and encourage the poor to better their situation, we can have a much better way of dealing with the issues and we as the government would not have to spend excessive amounts of money to fill the unfillable. Btw, why has no-one tackled the issues of poverty here? How many poor are there? What's the cutoff line between poor and rich? I have not seen a discussion on this in all my time here, and I doubt that Lovia is poor-free, cause ther's got to be at least 1. @TM- No party would ever get 99%, I was just using that to make a point that Labour lost seats because of this. You should remember that your party was given votes after voting time officially closed. Perhaps there is a problem if parties depend on votes from inactives to do well (it could be compared to expat and military votes deciding the outcome in the US. It's unrealistic but it happens in Lovia). HORTON11: • 14:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) :I think Labour actually gained seats because of that, although, granted, CCPL by far gained the most. Daembrales couldn't vote because he (or were they female?) joined one day too late. You should also remember that we let Wabba join the elections seven days late. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:56, May 6, 2012 (UTC) :Well, Wabba didn't get much votes. He only served to spread out Labor votes and he does not vote too often on proposals, so that could have actually been to the benefits of others. HORTON11: • 15:03, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ::He got sixth in the elections, after Kunarian. And three of those votes came from his "brother", who made sixty different edits on his user page within a half hour (and no other edits), went inactive for four days, and then came back, voted for Labour, and left for good. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 15:10, May 6, 2012 (UTC) The point I/TM was making was that you can't claim to be a 'party of the 99%' until you actually achieve that in an election. Also, I would say Labour (together with CCPL) benefited from inactive votes in the last elections. Yuri, Dimitri and Lars all gave votes to Marcus. --Semyon 14:54, May 6, 2012 (UTC) If I remember correctly, the CCPL also received a few votes from inactives, and Yuri was still semi-active at the time of elections. Anyways, the point is, until we can do something, inactives will still be voting and it is usually the old guard who would benefit. and one more thing, why does everyone attack Labour when we are not the top party. Oos is the prime minister and perhaps he should be on the sharp end of criticisms (no disrespect intended). HORTON11: • 15:03, May 6, 2012 (UTC) :Nah, he had left in early December, and said he would come back to vote in the elections and then leave for good. Horton, read my comment. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 15:08, May 6, 2012 (UTC) :That was quite far back, so I didn't really remember when he left. But we should still prevent that from happening, cause the inactives exercise their right to vote but don't uphold their responsibilities as citizens (the editing). I would not want to ban people from voting, but they should be encouraged to become more active if they choose to vote. HORTON11: • 17:50, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ::A good solution would be finding a workable number of edits the month before the election begins (say 20 across all namespaces). That would at least trigger some activity (albeit discussions) and perhaps it makes people more willing to stay, because they've perhaps forgotten how nice this place is :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 19:08, May 6, 2012 (UTC) :::I'd say one of the priorities here is getting Yuri and Dimitri to rejoin. They are really good with Lovia. The others would be. . . nice. :P —TimeMaster (talk • ) 02:29, May 7, 2012 (UTC) ::::Good luck :P Dimitri has had some bad experience with rejoining back in Libertas :P Bucu probably is not going to rejoin as well. Benopat perhaps... Bart never was really actively working on-line. And for the rest: no idea :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 09:32, May 7, 2012 (UTC) Category:Archive